Welcome to the International Skeptics Forum, where we discuss skepticism, critical thinking, the paranormal and science in a friendly but lively way. You are currently viewing the forum as a guest, which means you are missing out on discussing matters that are of interest to you. Please consider
registering so you can gain full use of the forum features and interact with other Members. Registration is simple, fast and free! Click here to register today.

Well, you know what they say; integrity and a dollar will buy you a cup of coffee. But not in Starbucks.

Dave

__________________Me: So what you're saying is that, if the load carrying ability of the lower structure is reduced to the point where it can no longer support the load above it, it will collapse without a jolt, right?

Yeah I've never been able to suppress that. If I had I would have been producing 'archaeological crazy stuff' for the fringe for large amounts of money for decades......sigh the utter tyranny of honesty.

Egyptian colonies in Greenland, the existence of Nato'wa confirmed, Macedonian colonies in the Pamirs (found by Victorian explorers, etc., etc., so much pseudo science I could have spewed out.

Yeah I've never been able to suppress that. If I had I would have been producing 'archaeological crazy stuff' for the fringe for large amounts of money for decades......sigh the utter tyranny of honesty.

Egyptian colonies in Greenland, the existence of Nato'wa confirmed, Macedonian colonies in the Pamirs (found by Victorian explorers, etc., etc., so much pseudo science I could have spewed out.

How about, rather than being killed by your incredulity, being constructive and offering an informed opinion of your own about the web like substance being formed.

It's safe to assume you don't know that magnesium and beryllium can form hydrides that are chain like. They are covalent polymeric hydrides.

So it's not a stretch for me to hypothesize that the substance in question is a polymeric hydrino hydride.

How about Mills stops dorking around a produces some actual results?

Then they have a Nobel prize and save the world.

__________________I suspect you are a sandwich, metaphorically speaking. -Donn
And a shot rang out. Now Space is doing time... -Ben Burch
You built the toilet - don't complain when people crap in it. _Kid Eager
Never underestimate the power of the Random Number God. More of evolutionary history is His doing than people think. - Dinwar

The Nobel committee's award is much less than can fleeced from gullible believers. Ask markie how much in investment has flowed into Mill's various renamed companies, paying him and other lucrative salaries to produce - nothing and to produce nothing for 30 years.

Markie what does Mill pay himself out of investor's money? There is nothing illegal in that by the way so why would you not tell us? How much, percentage wise, is paid out for infrastructure, salary, pensions, health care vs actual research?

Cotton candy? Laundry lint? Ceiling hadn't been dusted for cobwebs in a while?

None of those things form from smoke.

Quote:

Seriously, what demands an explanation there?

What chemical reaction could cause the formation of a fibrous material like that from smoke.

It seems to me that it's one thing to opine that what we're seeing is nonsense that has nothing to do with hydrinos, but another altogether to be able to say "that looks exactly like what happens with chemical reaction x". The former is almost certainly true, but the latter is a much stronger argument, in the same way that saying "the way that reactor is said to work is nonsense therefore what we're seeing isn't a reactor in action" is a weaker argument than "the way that reactor is said to work is nonsense and that looks exactly like an arc welder, therefore what we're seeing isn't a reaction in action".

The Nobel committee's award is much less than can fleeced from gullible believers. Ask markie how much in investment has flowed into Mill's various renamed companies, paying him and other lucrative salaries to produce - nothing and to produce nothing for 30 years.

Markie what does Mill pay himself out of investor's money? There is nothing illegal in that by the way so why would you not tell us? How much, percentage wise, is paid out for infrastructure, salary, pensions, health care vs actual research?

How should I know such things? I'm no insider. But, I would think that BLP's corporate investors who perform due diligence and risk assessment have access to information that makes BLP a worthwhile investment. I would also think that BLP runs a pretty lean and productive operation relative to other companies. They have my admiration for conducting groundbreaking research - both pure and applied - for decades, all without government funding at taxpayers expense. You may think they have produced 'nothing' for 30 years, but that is true only as it relates to a commercial product thus far. They have amassed intellectual property and trade secrets that are thrilling to contemplate.

How should I know such things? I'm no insider. But, I would think that BLP's corporate investors who perform due diligence and risk assessment have access to information that makes BLP a worthwhile investment. I would also think that BLP runs a pretty lean and productive operation relative to other companies. They have my admiration for conducting groundbreaking research - both pure and applied - for decades, all without government funding at taxpayers expense. You may think they have produced 'nothing' for 30 years, but that is true only as it relates to a commercial product thus far. They have amassed intellectual property and trade secrets that are thrilling to contemplate.

How should I know such things? I'm no insider. But, I would think that BLP's corporate investors who perform due diligence and risk assessment have access to information that makes BLP a worthwhile investment. I would also think that BLP runs a pretty lean and productive operation relative to other companies. They have my admiration for conducting groundbreaking research - both pure and applied - for decades, all without government funding at taxpayers expense. You may think they have produced 'nothing' for 30 years, but that is true only as it relates to a commercial product thus far. They have amassed intellectual property and trade secrets that are thrilling to contemplate.

Location: Ponylandistan! Where the bacon grows on trees! Can it get any better than that? I submit it can not!

Posts: 28,268

Originally Posted by Squeegee Beckenheim

None of those things form from smoke.

What chemical reaction could cause the formation of a fibrous material like that from smoke.

It seems to me that it's one thing to opine that what we're seeing is nonsense that has nothing to do with hydrinos, but another altogether to be able to say "that looks exactly like what happens with chemical reaction x". The former is almost certainly true, but the latter is a much stronger argument, in the same way that saying "the way that reactor is said to work is nonsense therefore what we're seeing isn't a reactor in action" is a weaker argument than "the way that reactor is said to work is nonsense and that looks exactly like an arc welder, therefore what we're seeing isn't a reaction in action".

I knew I'd seen something similar at some point in my life, and I remembered what is was today. Burning plastic. In my pyromaniac stage of youth, we were always looking for something cool looking to burn. One of our favorite things to light on fire and carry around was a wiffleball bat. I'm not sure what form of high impact plastic it was made from, but it would produce a wispy black smoke that had a cobweb like quality to it, and some amount of remaining mass that when it landed, looked very much like a black version of what we see remaining in the present case of Mills "demonstration". My guess is some plastic based insulation burned away, and what we see is the wispy unburnt remains. But I'm no scientist.

__________________"Never judge a man until you’ve walked a mile in his shoes...
Because then it won't really matter, you’ll be a mile away and have his shoes."

How should I know such things? I'm no insider.
But, I would think that BLP's corporate investors who perform due diligence and risk assessment have access to information that makes BLP a worthwhile investment. I would also think that BLP runs a pretty lean and productive operation relative to other companies. They have my admiration for conducting groundbreaking research - both pure and applied - for decades, all without government funding at taxpayers expense. You may think they have produced 'nothing' for 30 years, but that is true only as it relates to a commercial product thus far. They have amassed intellectual property and trade secrets that are thrilling to contemplate.
[/url]

It looks like they are well advised.

With thirty years of failure and not a penny returned to investor - yeah 'great' company. Probably good for generating losses for tax schemes too.

I knew I'd seen something similar at some point in my life, and I remembered what is was today. Burning plastic. In my pyromaniac stage of youth, we were always looking for something cool looking to burn. One of our favorite things to light on fire and carry around was a wiffleball bat. I'm not sure what form of high impact plastic it was made from, but it would produce a wispy black smoke that had a cobweb like quality to it, and some amount of remaining mass that when it landed, looked very much like a black version of what we see remaining in the present case of Mills "demonstration". My guess is some plastic based insulation burned away, and what we see is the wispy unburnt remains. But I'm no scientist.

That's definitely a good start. I'm not sure it entirely lines up with what we can see in the video, and nor can I find out what plastic wiffle bats would be made out of, but this is certainly the most promising answer so far.

Well, "smokewebs" are definitely a thing - I've seen them myself - they looked like black cobwebs.
In a nutshell they are caused by burning plastics recombining as polymer chains when the smoke cools and are very common after domestic fires. Google will give you a better explanation and images.
I'd be surprised if those filaments in the video aren't formed by that sort of process.

__________________"We must favour verifiable evidence over private feeling. Otherwise we leave ourselves vulnerable to those who would obscure the truth."
Richard Dawkins - The Enemies of Reason

Well, "smokewebs" are definitely a thing - I've seen them myself - they looked like black cobwebs.
In a nutshell they are caused by burning plastics recombining as polymer chains when the smoke cools and are very common after domestic fires. Google will give you a better explanation and images.
I'd be surprised if those filaments in the video aren't formed by that sort of process.

I would have to say that if it really is plastic, then that would seem to definitively rule out the possibility of people genuinely believing that they've stumbled onto something exciting and new, as it would appear that the filament that burns up would have to be made from plastic rather than metal.

I would have to say that if it really is plastic, then that would seem to definitively rule out the possibility of people genuinely believing that they've stumbled onto something exciting and new, as it would appear that the filament that burns up would have to be made from plastic rather than metal.

I think it's entirely possible that Mills really did think he was on to something when he first started out. It might well have gone from genuine investigation, to a bit of fudging whilst still sincere, to a lot of fudging as the truth began to dawn, to an outright scam, without there ever being a moment when he made a conscious decision to create such a scam. Now, of course, he has to go on with it, as the point where he could have legitimately called a halt has long passed.

__________________"If you trust in yourself ... and believe in your dreams ... and follow your star ... you'll still get beaten by people who spent their time working hard and learning things" - Terry Pratchett

Well, "smokewebs" are definitely a thing - I've seen them myself - they looked like black cobwebs.
In a nutshell they are caused by burning plastics recombining as polymer chains when the smoke cools and are very common after domestic fires. Google will give you a better explanation and images.
I'd be surprised if those filaments in the video aren't formed by that sort of process.

I wonder if you could cause fumes from an acrylic, like cyanoacrylate, to polymerize from vapor phase? Introduce an inert gas into, or pull a vacuum on vapors in a chamber to cause polymerization in the absence of oxygen?

__________________"You do not know anyone as stupid as Donald Trump. You just don’t.”-Fran Lebowitz"A target doesn't need to be preselected"-Jabba

I wonder if you could cause fumes from an acrylic, like cyanoacrylate, to polymerize from vapor phase? Introduce an inert gas into, or pull a vacuum on vapors in a chamber to cause polymerization in the absence of oxygen?

Well, the video shows them forming in the air, and it's unlikely that they had someone in a spacesuit (or even just an oxygen mask) doing the filming, so I'd say it's unlikely that it's just happening in a vacuum (or oxygen-depleted environment).

It seems to me that it's one thing to opine that what we're seeing is nonsense that has nothing to do with hydrinos, but another altogether to be able to say "that looks exactly like what happens with chemical reaction x". The former is almost certainly true, but the latter is a much stronger argument, in the same way that saying "the way that reactor is said to work is nonsense therefore what we're seeing isn't a reactor in action" is a weaker argument than "the way that reactor is said to work is nonsense and that looks exactly like an arc welder, therefore what we're seeing isn't a reaction in action".

I see your point but don't think it applies because this one video is not an isolated claim. In the context of Brilliant Light Power believers the argument you're asking for is simply a Whack a Mole argument. You'll just have to do it over and over again for every video they come up with. I think it's better to point out why this video, due to it's source, can't be taken seriously. Don't pretend the burden is on you to demonstrate why this is wrong, that's the appearance that helps BLP maintain the scam.

__________________REJ (Robert E Jones) posting anonymously under my real name for 30 years.

Make a fire for a man and you keep him warm for a day. Set him on fire and you keep him warm for the rest of his life.

Well, the video shows them forming in the air, and it's unlikely that they had someone in a spacesuit (or even just an oxygen mask) doing the filming, so I'd say it's unlikely that it's just happening in a vacuum (or oxygen-depleted environment).

I assumed I was looking into a chamber of some kind so I'll have another look at the video. They are careful never to show any visual context or details of the setup in their video; just the gee-whiz feature they're trying to promote.

ETA: Doh! Now I see you point about vacuum.

__________________"You do not know anyone as stupid as Donald Trump. You just don’t.”-Fran Lebowitz"A target doesn't need to be preselected"-Jabba

You'll just have to do it over and over again for every video they come up with.

Well, we don't have to do anything. I think, however, it would be the sceptical thing to do to attempt to demonstrate that each claim is wrong - or can be replicated by other methods - on its own merits.

Quote:

I think it's better to point out why this video, due to it's source, can't be taken seriously.

James Randi didn't disprove Uri Gellar's various claims by saying that they came from Uri Gellar, but by demonstrating that, for example, bending spoons is an old magician's trick that's accomplished through misdirection, or that it's trivially easy to move a compass by hiding a magnet up your sleeve. He could have just said "I showed that spoonbending doesn't require psychic powers, therefore I don't need to talk about magnets", but I don't think that would have been a great argument.

Quote:

Don't pretend the burden is on you to demonstrate why this is wrong, that's the appearance that helps BLP maintain the scam.

The burden is on him to provide evidence, and then anybody can assess that evidence in whatever way is possible, if they wish.

And besides all of that, I don't know about anybody else, but I think it's interesting. I think the majority of people posting in this thread will agree that what we're looking at has nothing whatsoever to do with hydrinos, but aren't you interested in what it actually is? Isn't trying to explain the unknown kind of why most of us are on this board? Isn't that what scepticism, as a movement, is about? Isn't discussing the scientific nature of things what this particular subforum is about? I've never seen anything quite like it before, and things that I've never seen before interest me. I find it gratifying to explain them or have them explained.

I also think finding out what this particular chemical reaction most likely is may offer some interesting insight. I mean, if we can work out what it likely is, then that may allow us to work out how likely it is that it's something that Mills & co discovered by accident as a side-effect of however they're setting up their experiments and so incorporated into a video or two, or whether it's an effect Mills or someone working for him already knew about (or found out about from some external source) and deliberately set about trying to replicate. I think that would be interesting in and of itself.

I'm generally curious about things. This is something I'm curious about. I'm honestly a little surprised that I seem to be the only one.

​Kilopower is a small, lightweight fission power system capable of providing up to 10 kilowatts of electrical power - enough to run several average households - continuously for at least 10 years. Four Kilopower units would provide enough power to establish an outpost
...
For more information about the Kilopower project, including images and video, visit:https://www.nasa.gov/directorates/spacetech/kilopower

__________________The social illusion reigns to-day upon all the heaped-up ruins of the past, and to it belongs the future. The masses have never thirsted after truth. They turn aside from evidence that is not to their taste, preferring to deify error, if error seduce them. Gustav Le Bon, The Crowd, 1895 (from the French)Canadian or living in Canada? PM me if you want an entry on the list of Canadians on the forum.

Ahhh so thats why Mills couldn't get his thermal exchange whosiwhatits and dynamic dynamo coolerising etceteraisators, that would solve the heat problem, NASA has no doubt bought the entire stock and paid off the companies and patent offices with taxpayer funds to prevent Mills from advancing. I guess Mills will have to go back to the drawing board

The conversion of thermal power to electrical power requires the use of a heat engine exploiting a cycle such as a Rankine, Brayton, Stirling, or steam-engine cycle

BLP has not yet attained a working Suncell even for generating thermal energy. (This awaits a completed ceramic version of Sun-cell which apparently doesn't have to be enclosed in a larger pressure vessel.)

A MHD would be the ideal because the hydrino reaction itself is highly ionizing due to the high energy light released from hydrino formation. The opposite charges are separated with a magnetic field and an electric current is generated from this. If you think NASA's development is exciting just wait.

__________________As Einstein once said, "If you can't think of something relevant to say, just make something up and attribute it to some really smart dead guy.""I find your lack of pith disturbing," - Darth Rotor..........
Don't be offended. I'm not calling you a serial killer. -- Ron Tomkins.

Of course, I'm not sure what that title has to do with the main independent claim:

Quote:

CLAIMS

1. An apparatus for providing lift from a gravitating body, comprising:
a free electron;
means of applying energy to said free electron;
means of forming a pseudoelectron, wherein a repulsive force away from a gravitating mass is created;
means of applying a field to said pseudoelectron; and
a repulsive force developed by said pseudoelectron in response to said applied field is impressed on said means for applying the field in a direction away from said gravitating body.

If you click around there, you can download a pdf copy of the Written Opinion of the International Search Authority, which usually forms the basis for the International Preliminary Report on Patentability. The last paragraph on the last page is of particular interest, where the examiner discusses the industrial applicability of the claimed subject matter.

Let's just say that it's extremely uncommon for an examiner at the WO/IPRP stage to argue that all the claims on file lack industrial applicability.

ETA:

here are the other independent claims:

Quote:

21. An apparatus for providing repulsion from a gravitating body, comprising
a pseudoelectron which experiences a repulsive force in the presence of the gravitating body; and
means for applying a field to the pseudoelectron,
wherein a repulsive force is developed by the pseudoelectron in response to the applied field and is impressed on said means for applying the field in a direction away from the gravitating body.

22. A method of forming pseudoelectrons comprising the step of providing at least one free electron;
providing an X-ray or gamma ray beam; and
providing the intersection of said at least one electron and X-ray or gamma ray beam such that the at least one electron forms at least one pseudoelectron.

__________________Obviously, that means cats are indeed evil and that ownership or display of a feline is an overt declaration of one's affiliation with dark forces. - Cl1mh4224rd

(This awaits a completed ceramic version of Sun-cell which apparently doesn't have to be enclosed in a larger pressure vessel.)

Sadly no Markie. It awaits the actual discovery of an actual hydrino. Something we must all wait forever for due to it not existing at all.

When all else fails, go back to basics. Has Mills ever ever ever in his 30+ years of work on hydrinos ever actually detected a single hydrino ever? The answer is no. He had a hypothesis that hydrinos were the cause of some anomalous readings he had on some equipment he was using. Period! The hypothesis has been falsified formally and repeatedly.

There is absolutely no evidence hydrinos exist. Period. There is actually a ton of evidence hydrinos can not exist. Period.

This means the default position is that hydrinos don't exist. They are a figment of Mills imagination. He is welcome to try and falsify this default position with evidence, but he has failed repeatedly.

So you can just forget about any hydrino based technology. It's a fraud, a hoax, a scam, a myth, or just wishful thinking; take your pick. But in any case it certainly isn't reality.

__________________Scott
"Permaculture is a philosophy of working﻿ with, rather than against nature; of protracted & thoughtful observation rather than protracted & thoughtless labour; & of looking at plants & animals in all their functions, rather than treating any area as a single-product system." Bill MollisonBiome Carbon Cycle Management

NASA successfully tested a nuclear reactor in space (SNAP-10A) back in, IIRC, 1965. NASA has been working on Stirling convertors for a long time, too; a project to fly an advanced convertor heated by Pu-238 isotope decay was shelved some years ago, although the convertors themselves stayed on long-term test with electric heaters at Glenn Research Center.

Of course, static conversion with RTGs has been providing ultra-reliable, if not particularly efficient, power for decades. Even longer than Mills has been running his scam, and just as reliably as sheeplike suckers fall for it.

This is no longer a debate about theory. This is a fully working prototype that's dumping out enough power to VAPORIZE 1/4" thick tungsten rods within seconds. No power source known to man is capable of doing that.

May 2018:

Originally Posted by markie

BLP has not yet attained a working Suncell even for generating thermal energy.

Spot the discrepancy.

Dave

__________________Me: So what you're saying is that, if the load carrying ability of the lower structure is reduced to the point where it can no longer support the load above it, it will collapse without a jolt, right?

BLP has not yet attained a working Suncell even for generating thermal energy. (This awaits a completed ceramic version of Sun-cell which apparently doesn't have to be enclosed in a larger pressure vessel.)

A MHD would be the ideal because the hydrino reaction itself is highly ionizing due to the high energy light released from hydrino formation. The opposite charges are separated with a magnetic field and an electric current is generated from this. If you think NASA's development is exciting just wait.

There is absolutely no evidence hydrinos exist. Period. There is actually a ton of evidence hydrinos can not exist. Period.

You say that, and yet:

For over 25 years Mills has left an undeniable trail of experimental evidence to show the hydrino exists. Spectral signatures from hydrino formation, tests confirming hydrino end product, large excess heat from calorimetry tests, controlled tests showing necessity of both atomic hydrogen and predicted catalysts. All in vast range of conditions: gas, plasma, aqueous, and solid environments and with results that have been validated by others and in accord with a predictive theory.

This forum began as part of the James Randi Education Foundation (JREF). However, the forum now exists as an independent entity with no affiliation with or endorsement by the JREF, including the section in reference to "JREF" topics.

Disclaimer: Messages posted in the Forum are solely the opinion of their authors.